apuszczalowski Posted June 18, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 That's what wasn't making sense to me. Of course Pittsburgh would love that trade, by why would Malone necessarily turn around and sign with Columbus without testing the market? You would sign that deal if you feel that its a good deal, and that you might not get more on the open market. That amount already questions weither its overpaying for him right now, how many teams are going to express interest now knowing that he wants more on the open market? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Vanek's contract is none of those things. It was a horrible strain on the real-cash budget last season at $10 million, but this year is is $8 million and the last four years of the deal are a very reasonable $6.4 million ... the cap hit is $7.143 million ... given the way the cap is going up, that's not an albatross, even if he just levels off and averages 35 goals a year. I'm not saying the Sabres deserve any credit, because they did not craft that deal, Edmonton did ... but given the way salaries are skyrocketing, the Vanek deal is a good one. And if nothing else, it probably was a driving force in the deal they ended up making with Roy. I'm sure most have no problem with that one. I think it was a big signal to this team that they need to start giving longer deals to the guys they really want to be the faces of the organization. You would sign that deal if you feel that its a good deal, and that you might not get more on the open market. That amount already questions weither its overpaying for him right now, how many teams are going to express interest now knowing that he wants more on the open market? As I said earlier in the thread, since the report said that the Wild and Canucks might be trade partners as well, there is interest out there. If Columbus actually does want to pay him that much, the offer isn't going to suddenly disappear. Where's the harm in testing the market in the first day or two, but knowing that you may have to act quickly before Columbus goes in another direction? Its a low risk situation. If that risk fails, he's still going to land a good deal somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Vanek's contract is none of those things. It was a horrible strain on the real-cash budget last season at $10 million, but this year is is $8 million and the last four years of the deal are a very reasonable $6.4 million ... the cap hit is $7.143 million ... given the way the cap is going up, that's not an albatross, even if he just levels off and averages 35 goals a year. I'm not saying the Sabres deserve any credit, because they did not craft that deal, Edmonton did ... but given the way salaries are skyrocketing, the Vanek deal is a good one. Sorry, but if he has 6 more years like the one he had this year, the contract is a debacle. I know he had 36 goals, which is good, but as I've posted before he had 11 goals in 41 games against 15 playoff teams this year (ie all playoff teams other than Boston). That's not $7.1 million per year production. Hat tricks against Tampa aren't what we need. There's also a real danger he turns into another Miro -- ie one year with goals in the mid-40s, the next year in the mid-30s, and the rest of his career in the low 30s and upper 20s -- all the while playing with a mail-it-in attitude. While I don't think he's another Miro, I also don't think anyone here can be totally confident in how he's going to turn out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Sorry, but if he has 6 more years like the one he had this year, the contract is a debacle. I know he had 36 goals, which is good, but as I've posted before he had 11 goals in 41 games against 15 playoff teams this year (ie all playoff teams other than Boston). That's not $7.1 million per year production. Hat tricks against Tampa aren't what we need. There's also a real danger he turns into another Miro -- ie one year with goals in the mid-40s, the next year in the mid-30s, and the rest of his career in the low 30s and upper 20s -- all the while playing with a mail-it-in attitude. While I don't think he's another Miro, I also don't think anyone here can be totally confident in how he's going to turn out. Maybe so, I'm certainly not claiming he had a good year. But if he's scoring 35 goals a year, I don't care who it is against, someone will take him in a trade ... the point was not about the player so much as the contract, and a $7.143 million cap hit does not make him untradeable ... it's about 12 percent of the projected cap for next season ... Now, if his career plays out like you say, I will stand corrected that it is a "good deal" ... but it still will not make him untradeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 18, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 As I said earlier in the thread, since the report said that the Wild and Canucks might be trade partners as well, there is interest out there. If Columbus actually does want to pay him that much, the offer isn't going to suddenly disappear. Where's the harm in testing the market in the first day or two, but knowing that you may have to act quickly before Columbus goes in another direction? Its a low risk situation. If that risk fails, he's still going to land a good deal somewhere. Sure there is other interest, but were those teams interested in paying him around what Columbus was? And, if he does turn down this deal now saying that Columbus would be stupid to make the trade because he will become a UFA, then who's to say they won't feel a little scorned by him and want to give him the same deal if he comes crawling back to them after he tests the market and leaves them hanging? Because what he is essentially doing right now is saying, "I know there is a demand for me, so i want you to get into a bidding war for my services and pay me more on the open market". It might all depend on how the other teams feel about a bidding war on him and if they feel he is worth the effort Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Sorry, but if he has 6 more years like the one he had this year, the contract is a debacle. I know he had 36 goals, which is good, but as I've posted before he had 11 goals in 41 games against 15 playoff teams this year (ie all playoff teams other than Boston). That's not $7.1 million per year production. Hat tricks against Tampa aren't what we need. There's also a real danger he turns into another Miro -- ie one year with goals in the mid-40s, the next year in the mid-30s, and the rest of his career in the low 30s and upper 20s -- all the while playing with a mail-it-in attitude. While I don't think he's another Miro, I also don't think anyone here can be totally confident in how he's going to turn out. True, and let's not forget that one huge month - February (13-7-20 in 15 games) really tipped the scale from a bad season (by his standards) to an acceptable season. (He averaged just under four goals/month for the other six months of the season, although it's tough to include April since he scored four goals in three games.) If he has an average month in February he finishes around 26-28 goals for the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Or, like Vanek's contract, you may have a big fat untradeable salary cap albatross around your team's neck for the next 7 years. I sincerely hope it's the scenario you posed. But I don't think you offer a guy a long-term deal unless you're sure about him. Free, thanks for giving me a chance to respond to something that I have wanted to address for awhile; After this year, Vanek's contract is far from cumbersome and easily tradeable if they so wish. 5 years at $6.4 million with a $7.13 cap hit for what will be at the very least a 25 year old 30 to 40 goal scorer. I would like add that I envision a long and illustrious career for Vanek with Buffalo but I just wanted to point out that I think he will be a very tradeable commodity after this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Sure there is other interest, but were those teams interested in paying him around what Columbus was? And, if he does turn down this deal now saying that Columbus would be stupid to make the trade because he will become a UFA, then who's to say they won't feel a little scorned by him and want to give him the same deal if he comes crawling back to them after he tests the market and leaves them hanging? Because what he is essentially doing right now is saying, "I know there is a demand for me, so i want you to get into a bidding war for my services and pay me more on the open market". It might all depend on how the other teams feel about a bidding war on him and if they feel he is worth the effort So by saying he'd like to test the market, the Blue Jackets will suddenly not be interested in him? That seems incredibly unlikely. He won't leave them hanging before the start of free agency though, because the trade is not going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Free, thanks for giving me a chance to respond to something that I have wanted to address for awhile; After this year, Vanek's contract is far from cumbersome and easily tradeable if they so wish. 5 years at $6.4 million with a $7.13 cap hit for what will be at the very least a 25 year old 30 to 40 goal scorer. I would like add that I envision a long and illustrious career for Vanek with Buffalo but I just wanted to point out that I think he will be a very tradeable commodity after this year. And the big thing that BTP hinted at is that with the way the cap continues to rise, that contract will not cause any trouble with tradeability, assuming that Vanek continues to develop positively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Another point that may have been made ( I haven't read the whole thread) is that if the NHLPA exerts any control over these players the way some think they do, I would think that this is one practice they would be dead set against. Signing for a hometown discount is one thing, allowing your former employer to control were you go and extract some return on your services just doesn't seem in the union's best interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Prospal from the Flyers to the Lightning for a 7th rdr..If he signs a contract witht the Lightning it adds a fourth rd. Jeff Carter I believe signed a 10 yr 25 mil contract with the Flyers.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 18, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 So by saying he'd like to test the market, the Blue Jackets will suddenly not be interested in him? That seems incredibly unlikely. He won't leave them hanging before the start of free agency though, because the trade is not going to happen. No, but by saying they would be stupid to make the trade because he is going to become a UFA, and wouldn't accept a very good deal from them might turn Columbus off of him and make them look somewhere else and forget about him because they aren't interested in a bidding war, which is the reason why they tried to get him before, but he wants the bidding war to drive his price up. AS for Vanek, who knows what the future holds, and the deal could go either way. Vanek could do like some said and become a consistent 35-40+ goalscorer and the deal is a bargain. Or he could become streaky like he did this season and struggle at times, padding his stats in blowouts against weaker teams. Or he could just level off and just be a 20-30 goal scorer and the deal will look bad, but it also depends on the cap too, if the cap continues to climb, then the tdeal will look good, like everybodys deal that is considered high now, if the cap levels off or goes down, then it might not look so good. The key is how the cap goes (up? down? level?) and what Vanek does in the next few years, its possible in 2-3 years, teams might find it too much to take a $7.3mil cap hit on a player thats considered only good or average Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 From a video clip on TSN, Darren Dreger says: --Lightning say no.1 pick is not available for trade unless someone blows them away with some out-of-this-world offer. Dreger says teams that are most likely to make that kind of offer are SJ, Florida and Carolina --SJ is shopping Marleau and Cheechoo --Panthers captain Ollie Jokinen has told Jacques Martin that he wants to be traded. According to one team Martin's asking price is two young NHL roster players AND a first-round draft pick --Carolina is looking for a defenseman, and is apparently targeting Edmonton's Joni Pitkanen, with Eric Cole, Justin Williams and Tuomo Ruuttu's names involved in trade talks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Jeff Carter I believe signed a 10 yr 25 mil contract with the Flyers.. Those numbers would be way under market for Carter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Those numbers would be way under market for Carter. I agree I am waiting for my friend to send me confirmation as far as a link goes.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 I agree I am waiting for my friend to send me confirmation as far as a link goes.. Please let us know. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Please let us know. :thumbsup: He's f'n' with me...He got me..He just told me Campbell was gonna sign a 5 yr 30 mill contract with the Sabes and that he 's pullin my leg..LOL..But Prospal did get traded to the Lightning.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Is anyone going to the Draft party at the Arena friday night? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 He's f'n' with me...He got me..He just told me Campbell was gonna sign a 5 yr 30 mill contract with the Sabes and that he 's pullin my leg..LOL..But Prospal did get traded to the Lightning.. Yeah there is a link on TSN for the Prospal trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted June 19, 2008 Report Share Posted June 19, 2008 He's f'n' with me...He got me..He just told me Campbell was gonna sign a 5 yr 30 mill contract with the Sabes and that he 's pullin my leg..LOL..But Prospal did get traded to the Lightning.. No offense, but if you actually believed those contract figures for Carter, you are incredibly gullible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted June 19, 2008 Report Share Posted June 19, 2008 Is anyone going to the Draft party at the Arena friday night? I may head during the afternoon radio show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreNod Posted June 19, 2008 Report Share Posted June 19, 2008 I may head during the afternoon radio show. Tom Webster! Hey, I haven't been around much, but y'know, I'm glad you're back. (Seriously). Having to be corrected now and then shouldn't preclude participation. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted June 19, 2008 Report Share Posted June 19, 2008 No offense, but if you actually believed those contract figures for Carter, you are incredibly gullible. Yes, Sometimes I fall for the your zipper is down trick.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 Yeah there is a link on TSN for the Prospal trade. Carter signed for 3 yrs 15 mill.... http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2008/06/19/...hree_year_deal/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Enabler Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 Carter signed for 3 yrs 15 mill....http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2008/06/19/...hree_year_deal/ Good move by Philly, even though we all hate them. <_< Also, good for Prospal, he's a good charector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.