[Signing] Wild re-sign Kirill Kaprizov

[iinatcc]

21 hours ago, khay said:

8 years at 10-11 mil would be what Petey would get if he were a UFA. Toronto was an abnormality because they screwed up their internal cap structure by signing Tavares to 11 +mil contract and it didn't make sense to not pay Matthews and then obviously Marner who had even better season than Matthews.

 

 

 

I brought this up to Leafs fans and their argument is that the Leafs don't have to worry about the cap because Dubas is a numbers guy and he knows what he is doing and that the cap is going to go up. 

 

So the latter is basically the same argument Benning fans here use to defend him

[khay]

16 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

I brought this up to Leafs fans and their argument is that the Leafs don't have to worry about the cap because Dubas is a numbers guy and he knows what he is doing and that the cap is going to go up. 

 

So the latter is basically the same argument Benning fans here use to defend him

Benning isn't going to give 11 mil to Petey.

 

Dubas is screwed since the cap ain't going up by much for the next little while. Another 1st round exit and they are going to realize that they need to trade one of the big 4.

 

 

[BigTramFan]

2 hours ago, khay said:

Dubas is screwed since the cap ain't going up by much for the next little while. Another 1st round exit and they are going to realize that they need to trade one of the big 4.

Yeah agreed. They need more forward depth. They also have the problem of Reilly expiring next season and looking for a big raise. They may have to let him walk then try and fill his spot by trading one of their big 4. They really only have 3 seasons to go until Matthews and Nylander leave as UFAs. But Dubas will certainly manage the cap!

[Noble 6]

20 hours ago, khay said:

Eichel is a good comparison, I agree that Petey's agent can even make a case that Petey is better than Eichel. But then, JB can always find other counter examples, like Point and Barzal and just point out the fact that Canucks don't operate like that dumpster fire Buffalo Sabres organization.

 

A fair long term deal for Petey is probably around 9-10 mil given that comparison and considering what Makar signed for.

 

But Canucks are not in a position to throw that type of money around, especially if the goal is to win.

 

Either Petey stays true to his words that he wants to win by instructing his agent that he will take a bridge deal like other equally good comparables like Point, Barzal did or... or he pulls a Matthews or Eichel and asks for 10+ mil on an 8 year deal.

 

Canucks might as well trade him if that's what Petey wants because we aren't winning with a 10 mil player on the roster, let alone the fact that it leaves no room to fit in Hughes.

 

The market is a bit crazy. As good as some of these young RFA players are, I think the only players that can get 10+ mil are UFAs who have years of delivering as a #1 scoring option (Tavares, Ovechkin), or RFAs that have delivered a cup (Toewes, Kane, Kopitar, Point) and special players like McDavid and Matthews (I cringe as I put Matthews in the same category as McDavid but he is an elite goal scorer).

 

Unfortunately, Petey doesn't fit into any of the three categories. So, he should get a 3-year bridge deal, show us that he belongs in one or even better, all three categories by winning a cup and winning Hart or Selke or Art Ross or Conn Smythe.

 

If he does win us a cup, I'm sure no one is going to complain if we pay him 11+ mil.

 

 

I don't think Makar is a good comparable for Pettersson at all as they play different positions.

 

Your assessment of who should get 10M+ on a deal is pretty reasonable. Again, that has no bearing on what Pettersson or any other RFA does; It's a case by case thing that depends on the demeanor of the player, the team, the owner, the fit, etc. Heiskanen definitely could have gotten a more expensive deal (especially for 8 years), but he prioritized staying in Dallas over everything else. William Karlsson did the same thing in Vegas; he prioritized term over cap hit. Then there are players like Tkachuk (either one) who set the bar high and never waiver. For every Pastrnak or MacKinnon that is willing to take less, there are other players like Stone or Werenski that take every dollar that they feel they deserve. 

 

I think one important distinction to make in this situation is that a player fighting to get what they feel they are worth is not related to their commitment to winning. As fans, the two are intertwined from our perspective because we are only invested in the cap hit that the team has to deal with. From the player's perspective, the money that they get on their contract effects their entire life outside of hockey. Player's aren't actively trying to sabotage their team by getting high numbers, they're employees trying to get the best paycheck possible. It's management's responsibility to build the team around the contracts that they give out. If and ony if, management feels that they won't be able to sign someone for under 10M AND they feel that they can't win with someone making 10M+, then they have a responsibility to make a tough call and trade them. These are the tough decisions that the big boys in management are paid for. 

 

Boston probably has the two best modern examples of this: the Thornton and Seguin trades. Management felt that for whatever reasons, these guys did not fit with the team that they were trying to build to be successful. They made the tough decision and moved them. They were probably motivated by reasons other than cap, but the principle is the same. You can argue whether or not their assessment was accurate or not, but they made a call and followed through with it. If management comes to the conclusion that Pettersson won't fit with their idea of a winning team, then they should move him. If they sign him for 10M+, then it should be because they feel they can win with him at that cap hit. The motivation shouldn't be any more complicated than that. 

[Viper007]

6 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

I don't think Makar is a good comparable for Pettersson at all as they play different positions.

 

Your assessment of who should get 10M+ on a deal is pretty reasonable. Again, that has no bearing on what Pettersson or any other RFA does; It's a case by case thing that depends on the demeanor of the player, the team, the owner, the fit, etc. Heiskanen definitely could have gotten a more expensive deal (especially for 8 years), but he prioritized staying in Dallas over everything else. William Karlsson did the same thing in Vegas; he prioritized term over cap hit. Then there are players like Tkachuk (either one) who set the bar high and never waiver. For every Pastrnak or MacKinnon that is willing to take less, there are other players like Stone or Werenski that take every dollar that they feel they deserve. 

 

I think one important distinction to make in this situation is that a player fighting to get what they feel they are worth is not related to their commitment to winning. As fans, the two are intertwined from our perspective because we are only invested in the cap hit that the team has to deal with. From the player's perspective, the money that they get on their contract effects their entire life outside of hockey. Player's aren't actively trying to sabotage their team by getting high numbers, they're employees trying to get the best paycheck possible. It's management's responsibility to build the team around the contracts that they give out. If and ony if, management feels that they won't be able to sign someone for under 10M AND they feel that they can't win with someone making 10M+, then they have a responsibility to make a tough call and trade them. These are the tough decisions that the big boys in management are paid for. 

 

Boston probably has the two best modern examples of this: the Thornton and Seguin trades. Management felt that for whatever reasons, these guys did not fit with the team that they were trying to build to be successful. They made the tough decision and moved them. They were probably motivated by reasons other than cap, but the principle is the same. You can argue whether or not their assessment was accurate or not, but they made a call and followed through with it. If management comes to the conclusion that Pettersson won't fit with their idea of a winning team, then they should move him. If they sign him for 10M+, then it should be because they feel they can win with him at that cap hit. The motivation shouldn't be any more complicated than that. 

Didn't they win the cup with Seguin?

[Noble 6]

2 hours ago, Viper007 said:

Didn't they win the cup with Seguin?

 

They did, and Seguin did pretty well in the Playoffs for a rookie. He scored that big goal against Tampa where he turnstiled the defenseman and buried it. 

 

Even after that, their management team (which included Benning) decided to move him. 

[Viper007]

Just now, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

They did, and Seguin did pretty well in the Playoffs for a rookie. He scored that big goal against Tampa where he turnstiled the defenseman and buried it. 

 

Even after that, their management team (which included Benning) decided to move him. 

Well, I sorta remember something about Seguin being a bit immature and needing to grow up, which may be one of the reasons why they traded him.  Kinda sounds like Virtanen.  Maybe that's why JB didn't trade him.  He saw how Seguin turned out, so he got gunshy in trading Virtanen.

[iinatcc]

On 9/23/2021 at 9:08 AM, khay said:

Benning isn't going to give 11 mil to Petey.

 

True Benning would rather give 3 million with term to a 4th liner. As someone said it's better to overpay superstars than 4th liners 

[IBatch]

38 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

True Benning would rather give 3 million with term to a 4th liner. As someone said it's better to overpay superstars than 4th liners 

[Sp3nny]

I think the whole "comparable contract" discussion is useful but also flawed. Not only is every player different, but every player has a different value to every team. Teams devoid of talent or with specific needs will pay extra to retain certain players, such as Werenski in CBJ or Kaprizov in MIN. And at the end of the day, the agent's do the negotiating, not the players. Werenski said his agent called him with his deal, and said it was pretty much an instant sign situation. Maybe he never expected or even wanted $9.5M, but he ain't gonna turn it down when it's offered to him.

 

As far as the Kaprizov contract goes, I think it's reasonable. Minny will be in tough with those buyouts in the coming years, which is another story, but I do feel earlier comments saying it's a terrible contract are wrong. Kaprizov is a great talent, both as a shooter and a passer. For his size, his puck protection skills are remarkable. His boardwork is great, and he goes to the net. Your paying for absolute prime years with him as well, as he is already 24. He came in and was basically a PPG player right away, without a great supporting cast offensively. Is it an overpayment? Ya, maybe a little, i think around $8M would have been fair. And of course his NHL sample size is smaller (he does have a very strong KHL resume). But find me a young 40G (rookie pace) PPG player who isn't going to be a bit overpaid these days. Essentially, KK is like a rookie coming off his bridge deal, signing his first big contract. In that context, it doesn't look as bad.

 

And personally, I like seeing these shorter term deals being made. The longer the contract, the more risk involved. Keeps players hungry and performing. If they don't, they can only ride their contract for so long.

[MikeBossy]

On 9/23/2021 at 1:08 AM, khay said:

Benning isn't going to give 11 mil to Petey.

 

Dubas is screwed since the cap ain't going up by much for the next little while. Another 1st round exit and they are going to realize that they need to trade one of the big 4.

 

 

With the team they have "built" anything less than conferences finals to me is a disaster

[iinatcc]

10 hours ago, IBatch said:

I believe this was a talking points in one of the hockey analyst in TSN 1040. I believe it was Ray Ferraro. Though I think he was referring more with Matthews' and Marner's extensions