[Signing] Capitals re-sign Conor Sheary

[-Vintage Canuck-]

 

[Josepho]

Washington gets a better, cheaper player who also has cup pedigree for a way better contract than Pearson.

 

Neat.

[kanucks25]

28 years-old

0.5 PPG

"plays the right way"

1.5M AAV x 2 Y

 

lol

[Master Mind]

Good signing for the Caps, and yet another example showing Pearson was overpaid. He's not worth more than double what Sheary makes.

[Bure_Pavel]

Must be nice to have a GM who can negotiate a contract.  

[mordekai]

Sheary after tax income $815k
Pearson after tax income $1.5mil

Thats right folks, what you think is a 1.75million difference in contract is actually only $735k after tax. 
and easy for folks to criticize dim jim but Sheary probably take that discount to play with Stanley cup contenders as long as ovie is playing.

 

edit: players new salary

Edited April 14, 2021 by mordekai

[mordekai]

28 minutes ago, Josepho said:

Washington gets a better, cheaper player who also has cup pedigree for a way better contract than Pearson.

 

Neat.

i didn't realize Pearson didn't win a cup. 

[wallstreetamigo]

19 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

Good signing for the Caps, and yet another example showing Pearson was overpaid. He's not worth more than double what Sheary makes.

It will be fun watching theBenning supporters bending themselves into pretzels to come up with all the reasons this contract isn't comparable.

 

 

[theo5789]

Calling Sheary a 0.5 PPG player is a bit of an overstatement. He had 3 points in his last game to bump his numbers up a bit for this season, but prior to that he was on pace for 33 (over 82 games). He's more of a 30-35 point guy (he had a good run with Crosby to up his career numbers). He doesn't PK at all. And this season he has 20 hits in 40 games so far. Plus he's 5'8.

 

Pearson has had more 40+ point seasons. PKs and contributes in a shutdown capacity with Horvat. 40 hits in 33 games so far this season. I'd say Pearson has more of an impact to the overall game than Sheary does. Both players are the same age.

[kanucks25]

9 minutes ago, mordekai said:

Sheary after tax income $815k
Pearson after tax income $1.5mil

Thats right folks, what you think is a 1.75million difference in contract is actually only $735k after tax. 
and easy for folks to criticize dim jim but Sheary probably take that discount to play with Stanley cup contenders as long as ovie is playing.

 

edit: players new salary

After tax salary...

 

CDC continues to find new ways to amaze me 

[Josepho]

Just now, mordekai said:

i didn't realize Pearson didn't win a cup. 

He did win a cup, I never said otherwise. But I've heard "cup-winner" as a justification for signings like Beagle/Pearson even though other players with cup pedigree have been signed to actual good contracts.

[mordekai]

4 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

After tax salary...

 

CDC continues to find new ways to amaze me 

And after tax salary doesn't matter for a player why?

 

[Josepho]

9 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Calling Sheary a 0.5 PPG player is a bit of an overstatement. He had 3 points in his last game to bump his numbers up a bit for this season, but prior to that he was on pace for 33 (over 82 games). He's more of a 30-35 point guy (he had a good run with Crosby to up his career numbers). He doesn't PK at all. And this season he has 20 hits in 40 games so far. Plus he's 5'8.

 

Pearson has had more 40+ point seasons. PKs and contributes in a shutdown capacity with Horvat. 40 hits in 33 games so far this season. I'd say Pearson has more of an impact to the overall game than Sheary does. Both players are the same age.

Pearson WAS a better player at one point, I won't deny that. And yes, there was a time where he was a great fit with Horvat. However, his trajectory has been awful.

 

Since the start of February 2020, including the playoff bubble, Pearson has had 25 points in 68 games despite getting plenty of ice-time and getting many chances to get empty net points. Those numbers just aren't acceptable for a player in his role and you don't invest decent money into a player that has been declining like this.

 

It seems like exhibit #500 of us playing a player for his past instead of his present or future.

Edited April 14, 2021 by Josepho

[wallstreetamigo]

12 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Calling Sheary a 0.5 PPG player is a bit of an overstatement. He had 3 points in his last game to bump his numbers up a bit for this season, but prior to that he was on pace for 33 (over 82 games). He's more of a 30-35 point guy (he had a good run with Crosby to up his career numbers). He doesn't PK at all. And this season he has 20 hits in 40 games so far. Plus he's 5'8.

 

Pearson has had more 40+ point seasons. PKs and contributes in a shutdown capacity with Horvat. 40 hits in 33 games so far this season. I'd say Pearson has more of an impact to the overall game than Sheary does. Both players are the same age.

For over twice the cap hit and one extra year plus trade and expansion protection? 

 

Please. Given the list of "comparables" used to support the Pearson contract, not one I have seen is actually a better comparable than Sheary. 

 

Pearson had a good run with some great players in LA and with Horvat to boost his numbers. And a lot of empty net goals too lol. That sword has to cut both ways bud.

 

You make it sound like Pearson is ourmain pk guy who we couldnt replace for a million bucks. That Highmore guy all theBenning supporters are concimced is a steal for Gaudette could probably step in and do a similar job.

Edited April 14, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[Fanuck]

I'm not going to condemn or defend Pearson's contract by virtue of a simple 'numbers'  side by side comparison to this one. We all know hockey is far more than a numbers game. 

 

JB said when he announced the Pearson signing that he was a huge presence in the leadership core of the team in the dressing room.  

We have no idea, despite what some people here may believe, what actually goes on with the team and how it's leadership works on the bench or off the ice but if JB says Pearson is a big part of it I have to take him at his word.  He also mentioned Pearson had a important impact on the younger players currently on the team.  When we let Tanev go, we saw how that affected Huggy - perhaps JB was willing to pay a premium to keep part of the leadership of the team in tact after seeing what losing some key vets did to the team last off season?

 

Like I said, I'm not defending or condemning JB's signing, just that there's more to it than putting the contracts side by side on capfriendly and making judgements from there. 

[Simulation]

[Rick Blight]

4 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

I'm not going to condemn or defend Pearson's contract by virtue of a simple 'numbers'  side by side comparison to this one. We all know hockey is far more than a numbers game. 

 

JB said when he announced the Pearson signing that he was a huge presence in the leadership core of the team in the dressing room.  

We have no idea, despite what some people here may believe, what actually goes on with the team and how it's leadership works on the bench or off the ice but if JB says Pearson is a big part of it I have to take him at his word.  He also mentioned Pearson had a important impact on the younger players currently on the team.  When we let Tanev go, we saw how that affected Huggy - perhaps JB was willing to pay a premium to keep part of the leadership of the team in tact after seeing what losing some key vets did to the team last off season?

 

Like I said, I'm not defending or condemning JB's signing, just that there's more to it than putting the contracts side by side on capfriendly and making judgements from there. 

We can all find good and bad contracts that all GM's have signed.

I agree with you that the pure points mean little (although Pearson has more over the past 3 seasons) and I think a good example of that would be a comparison of Motte to Sheary. How happy would Canucks fans be with a Sheary for Motte trade? How many would be happy with a Horvat for Kuznetsov trade with almost identical points over the past 3 regular seasons and playoffs?

 

Everybody can come up with similar comparisons to suit their own narratives but I would venture to say nobody wins those arguments.

 

[JM_]

1 hour ago, mordekai said:

i didn't realize Pearson didn't win a cup. 

I didn't realize Sheary wanted to be a Canuck. 

[theo5789]

47 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

For over twice the cap hit and one extra year plus trade and expansion protection? 

 

Please. Given the list of "comparables" used to support the Pearson contract, not one I have seen is actually a better comparable than Sheary. 

 

Pearson had a good run with some great players in LA and with Horvat to boost his numbers. And a lot of empty net goals too lol. That sword has to cut both ways bud.

 

You make it sound like Pearson is ourmain pk guy who we couldnt replace for a million bucks. That Highmore guy all theBenning supporters are concimced is a steal for Gaudette could probably step in and do a similar job.

The fact is Pearson can play multi-roles. I never said he was a premier PKer. Sheary doesn't at all. Versatility in a player is actually a positive and it's not like Sheary's offense is significantly better (certainly not over their careers thus far) to offset that. There is no doubt that Pearson is the better player amongst the two. Now they worth in ratio to their salaries is a different thing, but they are certainly not equivalent players. We could sign someone like Sheary for cheaper, but that doesn't mean he could replace what Pearson does.

 

As for the empty net numbers, it's joked about as easy points and sure it is. However there's a reason why he's out there late in a close game trying to defend a lead and simply being rewarded for their effort with the empty net points. He had career numbers last year, above his norm, and that was likely due to the inflation with the empty net points. But his salary isn't indicative of the 53 point pace he was having that season, but rather to his norm of 40 points a year along with his defensive and physical acumen.

[Whorvat]

If you are actually comparing Conor Sheary to Tanner Pearson, come playoffs tell me which player you'd rather have?

 

Conor Sheary - 5'9 178lbs

Career PPG: .46

19/20 PPG: .36

Playoff PPG: .34

 

Tanner Pearson - 6'1 200lbs

Career PPG: .46

19/20 PPG: .65

Playoff PPG: .45

 

I know who I'm taking, every single dang day of the week. And it ain't even close

Edited April 14, 2021 by Whorvat