[Signing] Stars re-sign Joe Pavelski

[coryberg]

7 hours ago, Canuckster86 said:

If JT signs a 5yr 9m per deal you do it from Vancouver stand point.

[aGENT]

5 hours ago, KirkSave said:

But he's in his late 30's and is doooomed to decline

It's not the age, it's the term and cap. Pavelski at 1 or 2 year increments and +/- $6m is GREAT. I would never have signed him for 8 years at +/- $8.5m, at 30 years old however. WAY too much risk.

[Guest]

20 hours ago, Canuckster86 said:

Agreed, but is 7m he makes now and 5.5m next year the same as JT and his 8-9m annual salary for his mid 30s aged seasons? I doubt JT can perform at Pavelski's current level and JT would be making a lot more $ too. If JT signs a 5yr 9m per deal you do it from Vancouver stand point. I also like the idea of having an internal cap and having a set bar for 1 player to make no more than X Y or Z salary...for example I don't want any Canucks making 10m or more per season, you can't have a balanced team...not in Vancouver in a tax free state like Florida etc that is a savings on its own compared to Vancouver, sad that it exists as it is a factor when players sign more often than not I would bet!

Internal cap is a must, although you can argue that JT Miller is the top dog in Vancouver and should be paid like one.  So in a way if we do resign him, we are setting the ceiling mark and as you said it will be a very important one to keep reasonable.  With the world resuming and the cap hopefully going up in two-three years more then just a million, having JT Miller on the team making 8.5 million would be very manageable. 

 

Joe Pavelski has turned out to be a great get for Dallas over his entire deal and is a great resigning for a very low risk one year deal. 

[KirkSave]

12 hours ago, aGENT said:

It's not the age, it's the term and cap. Pavelski at 1 or 2 year increments and +/- $6m is GREAT. I would never have signed him for 8 years at +/- $8.5m, at 30 years old however. WAY too much risk.

There is a risk on with long term deals with any player. GM's hedge their bets and hope their decisions pay off.  After the Bubble performance, JB forsaw Demko as the number 1 guy but until this season, it was a bit of a question mark. Now he has established himself as a top goalie and his contract looks great now but at the time, it was a risk for JB to move on from Markstrom and believe Demko could be the guy without a huge sample size. Risk led to reward.

 

We have seen over the past 3 seasons that JT drives the bus for this club emotionally and offensively. I would say that is a solid sample size to forecast he keeps playing great hockey for years to come. Is an 8 year deal risky, sure. Is a 5 or 6 year deal more to the fan bases liking, yes. At the end of the day, the narrative that once you hit your 30's your game HAS to decline/fall off a cliff is false (not every player becomes a Loui Erickson). Pavelski, Kane, Crosby, Letang, Giroux, Kopitar, Suter, Bergeron, Marchand, Josi are all living proof of this.

 

Ultimatley, we can piss and moan all we want about what is best to do with Miller but it doesn't matter. He holds the keys to his future. Unless we offer more than market value, I suspect he will test UFA. Then he can pick his spot. Maybe it's Van? If it is though, I hope a 5-6 year deal is what is agreed upon but I don't think that is likely simply because his overall game is what all teams are after and he will be highly coveted should he hit free agency in the summer of 2023. Whatever Miller wants Miller gets.

 

Que Sera Sera.

[BertaNuck]

23 hours ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

Damn. Was hoping he would make it to UFA and get a crack at him.

 

I think he would be a good piece to bring some more leadership and has been aging like a fine wine offensively but guess you will have to look elsewhere.

With the new management we have I see a swing for malkin as a free agent, to help podz along 

 

 

[aGENT]

2 hours ago, KirkSave said:

There is a risk on with long term deals with any player. GM's hedge their bets and hope their decisions pay off.  After the Bubble performance, JB forsaw Demko as the number 1 guy but until this season, it was a bit of a question mark. Now he has established himself as a top goalie and his contract looks great now but at the time, it was a risk for JB to move on from Markstrom and believe Demko could be the guy without a huge sample size. Risk led to reward.

While there is certainly risk to any contract, those two are not remotely the same. One is a goalie entering his prime at a moderate cap hit, the other is a forward, exiting his in what will be a very large cap hit. The risk is FAR greater with the latter.

 

2 hours ago, KirkSave said:

 

We have seen over the past 3 seasons that JT drives the bus for this club emotionally and offensively. I would say that is a solid sample size to forecast he keeps playing great hockey for years to come. Is an 8 year deal risky, sure. Is a 5 or 6 year deal more to the fan bases liking, yes. At the end of the day, the narrative that once you hit your 30's your game HAS to decline/fall off a cliff is false (not every player becomes a Loui Erickson). Pavelski, Kane, Crosby, Letang, Giroux, Kopitar, Suter, Bergeron, Marchand, Josi are all living proof of this.

Outliers are a poor framework to make major, long term, large cap allocation decisions on. And it's not "when you hit your 30's". It's 32. There's overwhelming statistical evidence that the vast majority of forwards decline, sharply, at or right around 32. The math clearly shows we likely get two years of full value out of any new Miller deal and it's downhill and an increasing anchor from there. Right when we should be contending, with our young core at their peaks.

 

Is it possible Miller turns out to be an outlier as well? Sure. That's not anything prudent management should be gambling on though IMO. Especially not with where we are in our cycle. If Petey and Hughes were already 26-28 and the D more fleshed out... By all means.

 

2 hours ago, KirkSave said:

Ultimatley, we can piss and moan all we want about what is best to do with Miller but it doesn't matter. He holds the keys to his future. Unless we offer more than market value, I suspect he will test UFA. Then he can pick his spot. Maybe it's Van? If it is though, I hope a 5-6 year deal is what is agreed upon but I don't think that is likely simply because his overall game is what all teams are after and he will be highly coveted should he hit free agency in the summer of 2023. Whatever Miller wants Miller gets.

 

Que Sera Sera.

Agreed on that. I'd happily sign Miller to a $7.5x4-5 year deal. Don't see any way he's going to do that though.

[Gawdzukes]

On 3/11/2022 at 1:08 PM, -AJ- said:

I wish performance bonuses could be a thing for more contracts.

 

On 3/11/2022 at 1:56 PM, Canuckster86 said:

That would be great, then when you have a flop of a signing you can cut the player or they earn only a base salary if they don't meet certain point or games played requirements etc

I wish, would love to see that too. NHLPA is dead set against though if I recall correctly. Something similar to the NFL where you can dump a contract for a horribly under performing player.