| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 11/01/2013 : 11:46:00
Daniel and Henrik are reported to have signed matching 4 year / 28M contract extensions today.
I dont' actually see anything on the net yet 11:45PST but it's been reported on the radio?
Thoughts?
ETA.....found a link.
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=689523 |
| 16 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 11/04/2013 : 08:52:30
Are we discussing whether or not the Sedin's signed contracts of there value or whether or not there contracts handcuff the Canucks. Clearly both have earned there contracts and it was discussed on Hockey Night in Canada that this might still be a hometown discount to continue playing together. How many teams would find room for 2 ppg 100 point players, former Art Ross winners a few years removed at $14 million per year. I have mentioned in the Kessel thread, Henrick (to me) is worth more money than Kessel and Daniel is pretty close on the open market to Kessel's value. I especially like the 4 year term which has way less risk as most comparable player contracts. As much as I had knocked these 2 players in the past, I have actually grown to like them and they are definite HOF candidates when they retire. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 11/04/2013 : 06:34:12
quote:
Originally posted by Statman
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
If the Canucks signed the Sedin's to a 4 year deal paying 27M in year one and 333K for the following 3, would it matter?
Yeah, actually it would matter immensely. The fact is that they wouldn't play those final seasons. They're only tacked on the end of contracts to change the cap hit and fudge the numbers on how much a team is actually paying a player. The reality is that we are getting both Sedin's for the price of Weber and that seems like a pretty good deal to me.
Having said that, I do understand and accept your ideas on the importance of looking at the cap hit as it pertains to the overall effect on a team for the future, which is certainly relevant to this thread as well as the raw dollar figures.
Fair enough. But that's part of my point. Nashville isn't handcuffed 14M this season or the next few. Only their owner is. They can still build a team around a guy who on paper costs them just under 8.
ETA - It's much like the Luongo deal that was signed pre new CBA. He's costing the owners 6.7M this season, but only 5.3 to Gillis and the Canucks as they try to sign others and build a quality team. In 10/11 when Luongo was paid 10M, same thing, it only cost the team 5.3 of cap space to build around him!
I get that Weber may not be playing and collecting his 1M per season at the end of his contract, but as a fan of the game and of the team, it's more to do with cap hit than what a guy is actually collecting. |
| Statman |
Posted - 11/03/2013 : 23:43:26
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
If the Canucks signed the Sedin's to a 4 year deal paying 27M in year one and 333K for the following 3, would it matter?
Yeah, actually it would matter immensely. The fact is that they wouldn't play those final seasons. They're only tacked on the end of contracts to change the cap hit and fudge the numbers on how much a team is actually paying a player. The reality is that we are getting both Sedin's for the price of Weber and that seems like a pretty good deal to me.
Having said that, I do understand and accept your ideas on the importance of looking at the cap hit as it pertains to the overall effect on a team for the future, which is certainly relevant to this thread as well as the raw dollar figures. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 11/03/2013 : 20:50:20
quote:
Originally posted by Statman
Umm...why are we comparing cap hit instead of salary again?
Statman, to add to what nuxfan said, it's 100% relevant to the conversation, so why wouldn't we??? If the Canucks signed the Sedin's to a 4 year deal paying 27M in year one and 333K for the following 3, would it matter? Who cares where the money comes from or when the players get it? The cap hit is the most important part as it's what determines what other players a team can sign. I don't see why you are implying that the cap hit is not important to this discussion? No one was comparing what the Sedin's will make this year or next, we were discussing the contract they signed, which obviously includes an important cap hit. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 11/03/2013 : 18:14:40
quote:
Originally posted by Statman
Umm...why are we comparing cap hit instead of salary again?
Personally, I only care about cap hits. Salary from year to year can be arbitrary, front loaded contracts and signing bonuses can skew them. Salary caps are what teams live and die by, and cap hit is where a player should be measured. |
| Statman |
Posted - 11/03/2013 : 01:53:42
Umm...why are we comparing cap hit instead of salary again? |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 11/02/2013 : 11:42:33
quote:
Originally posted by fanoleaf
Hardly fair to compare Weber to Sedins. Weber signed before new CBA.
Had the Sedins been signed at that time perhaps they would have been signed to an outrageous contract also. I don't think the contracts are grossly over paid, just slightly.
Agreed. If you're going to compare them to Weber and his deal, you need to compare the cap hit, not the yearly salary! Weber's cap his is slightly over 7.85M per year. Personally I don't care what an owner wants to shell out, it's what can he afford to in the salary cap world? Weber's contract is front loaded with 1M per owing on the final 3 years. Sure, it was pre-CBA and that's a factor, but again, for me, it's all about the cap hit as that determines what other players a team can afford to have with their high priced guys!!!
I don't agree with the Sedin's being overpaid really. As I stated, I had hoped the Canucks could have gotten them a little cheaper (again, so they could afford more around them), but I think they got a fair deal and likely would have commanded more on the open market. It's hard to argue they're overpaid when they fit in at a tie for 16th in cap hits with Spezza, Thornton, Doughty, Rinne, Semin and Rask. Sure, some G's and a D may be tough to compare to, but with the others, I think it's safe to say they're either better or on par with them. It's always difficult because of the "twin factor" which imo, should mean you get them for a little less than what a single guy would (if they wanna stick together and be at their best that way, they should concede a bit of a discount).
Lastly, compare them to a guy like Iggy. He just finished up making 7M per for the past 8 seasons, right through his prime and right up until age 36 (the Sedin's are 33). |
| fanoleaf |
Posted - 11/02/2013 : 06:23:05
Hardly fair to compare Weber to Sedins. Weber signed before new CBA.
Had the Sedins been signed at that time perhaps they would have been signed to an outrageous contract also. I don't think the contracts are grossly over paid, just slightly. |
| Statman |
Posted - 11/02/2013 : 04:08:06
So you guys think 7 million is too much? Just consider that Shea Weber is getting paid 14 million per season. That's the price for BOTH Sedins. Yeah...suddenly sounds pretty reasonable... |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 11/01/2013 : 17:40:30
The fact they got it done already was more surprising to me than it was a relief. To be honest, unless talks stalled in a serious way or there was some sort of standoff, i don't think this would have been a distraction for these two. They just seem to be wired differently than others and as long as there was progress or a deal was close, i don't think it would have affected them.
Funny though, just the other day, the contract negotiations and the progess on such, was discussed and everything pointed towards both sides being happy with where it was at, and that they were just waiting on info regarding the cap and what it may or may not do (increase to). I read that as though the team and the twins were willing to give or take a little depending on where the cap ended up? Unless they have or rec'd info that hasn't been made public, they must have pushed on by that obstacle and found common ground where both were content. |
| just1n |
Posted - 11/01/2013 : 16:37:35
Good to get it done now too, late in the season would be a distraction for sure. Hopefully the prospects in the system are somewhat decent! |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 11/01/2013 : 16:11:51
Nux, i too was hoping in the 6's (6.5?) but after the big hometown discount they gave on the last contract it was unlikely. As former Art Ross/Hart/Pearson award winners, the extra 500K (beyond what i hoped for) could be looked at as a bonus! I'm okay with this, as we have to assume the cap will rise and as i've stated before, skating isn't their big thing therefore if they begin to slow down in that regard, they should still be ok. I'd be absolutely shocked if they're not above 50pt players 4 years from now. I'd be guessing more like 60. I see them, providing continued good fortune health wise, as 75-85pt this year, 70-75 next and 60-65 the two final years with 70+ not out of the question.
I've heard that the Canucks wanted a 3 year deal, the Sedin's 5, thus a compromise. I also agree that they're very likely to retire Canucks though anything is possible.
Toughest thing for the Canucks is the "what if they didn't" question. Another team would have signed them for this deal and probably more without a doubt. Then where would the Canucks be? These guys are exactly the type of guys the team needs around here to lead some of the youngsters by example. Guys like Gaunce, Horvat, Shinkaruk, etc will be groomed by these guys, much like Datsyuk and Zetterberg do with the guys in Detroit.
Overall, i'm okay with the deal and maybe it was wishful thinking on my part to hope for something in the mid 6's?  |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 11/01/2013 : 15:41:49
quote:
Originally posted by fanoleaf
The $'s are going to handcuff the team in a couple years IMO. Management will be forced to keep the twins as teams aren't going to want to pick up the 14 mil as they are a package deal. They would be good bargaining pieces to get picks / players in a couple years but as I mentioned, I think difficult to deal.
I don't think there is any desire to deal. The Sedin's will likely retire as Canucks, undoubtedly as all time scoring leaders, both over 1000 games and possibly 1000 points.
Term is reasonable, both should be pretty productive at 37 - someone else mentioned, they are extremely fit players and have proven to be durable over the years. Probably not PPG by then, but 50 points is likely. 7M per is reasonable - it's not like they can do what Kessel does every night...  . I would have liked to see them at 6.something, but can live with this |
| just1n |
Posted - 11/01/2013 : 14:06:29
Not sure what else Gillis could do here. Without the twins, as they've shown this year, the Canucks wouldn't be doing a whole lot. Agreed that the price tag is going to be a bit high in a couple years, and I'm sure Gillis was hoping for a shorter term, but I bet they would have made more on the open market. |
| fanoleaf |
Posted - 11/01/2013 : 13:19:23
Nice work by Gillis
The Canucks should now be able to continue to make the playoffs only to continue to get knocked out in the first round. I guess not much thought was given to the future.
The $'s are going to handcuff the team in a couple years IMO. Management will be forced to keep the twins as teams aren't going to want to pick up the 14 mil as they are a package deal. They would be good bargaining pieces to get picks / players in a couple years but as I mentioned, I think difficult to deal. |
| just1n |
Posted - 11/01/2013 : 13:12:30
Seems like a decent deal, on par with the rest of the league. Glad they're doing well with Torts. |
|
|
