HSF
Registered User
- Sep 3, 2008
- 26,264
- 7,760
hes our best offensive forward right nowHave never really watched this guy play but his stats are impressive. Might this guy be our best forward?
hes our best offensive forward right nowHave never really watched this guy play but his stats are impressive. Might this guy be our best forward?
Act like what, he said he wants to see if he is a good fit on team.I caught that too. My perspective is, that we trade him at the deadline if he continues to act likes this.
He's probably also a realist, you see ~35M dedicated long term to forwards in the last two years? He probably realises he may be the odd man out.Act like what, he said he wants to see if he is a good fit on team.
Ya, or maybe at least our best goal scorer.hes our best offensive forward right now
I don’t think that’s fair to say just based off that sentence. He hasn’t even played a game yet, it’s to early to discuss a contract.Something about his last few sentences worries me that he might not think he signs here long term. I think he will demand top dollar.
I don’t think that’s fair to say just based off that sentence. He hasn’t even played a game yet, it’s to early to discuss a contract.
It wasn't too early for Fiala, Tkachuk or Huberdeau, despite not having played a game for their new teams.
Definitely our best forwardHave never really watched this guy play but his stats are impressive. Might this guy be our best forward?
Nah dude it’s terribleDifferent situations.
Tkachuk and Fiala both knew that they were not going to re-sign with their former teams, were up front about it, and essentially navigated their way to their preferred destinations by limiting who they would talk extension with.
Huberdeau got a contract offer that he and his agent knew would not be matched in free-agency.
DeBrincat, from all reports, wanted to stay in Chicago and was not involved in any trade discussions. And we're not going to come in with a way over the top offer of $10.5M per.
HuhI caught that too. My perspective is, that we trade him at the deadline if he continues to act likes this.
So we're Tkachuk and Fiala supposed to retire when they got traded, because they either needed to sign something with a team they never played for, or not play since their contracts were up.It wasn't too early for Fiala, Tkachuk or Huberdeau, despite not having played a game for their new teams.
Different situations.
Tkachuk and Fiala both knew that they were not going to re-sign with their former teams, were up front about it, and essentially navigated their way to their preferred destinations by limiting who they would talk extension with.
Huberdeau got a contract offer that he and his agent knew would not be matched in free-agency.
DeBrincat, from all reports, wanted to stay in Chicago and was not involved in any trade discussions. And we're not going to come in with a way over the top offer of $10.5M per.
Is that $14.1 taking into account what may be coming off the books as well? I know after 23-24, they are getting 5M back from buyouts being doneGenerally, I prefer longer/max term contracts as well.
But, IF Debrincat's contract is $8.5 m starting in 2023-24, we'll have $14.1 of projected cap space to work with another 9 or 10 players to sign (for a 21 or 22 player roster). Two of players to sign would be Zub and a goalie (Talbot or his replacement). Just thinking out loud, looking at the numbers, and wondering.
What's different about the situations is that Tkachuk and Fiala were willing to re-sign with their new teams without playing a single game with them because they are very attractive destinations.
Huberdeau re-signed in Calgary because he got a massive contract from a desperate team looking to remain a contender. That's the kind of contract we'll probably need to give DeBrincat to keep him in Ottawa.
If it comes to it I'd rather trade DeBrincat for assets than throw a 10-11M x 8YR contract at him. Not sure why he'd take any less when Tkachuk just got 9.5M x 8YRs in sunny tax-free Florida.
Ottawa has a pretty poor rep around the leagueWhat's different about the situations is that Tkachuk and Fiala were willing to re-sign with their new teams without playing a single game with them because they are very attractive destinations.
Huberdeau re-signed in Calgary because he got a massive contract from a desperate team looking to remain a contender. That's the kind of contract we'll probably need to give DeBrincat to keep him in Ottawa.
If it comes to it I'd rather trade DeBrincat for assets than throw a 10-11M x 8YR contract at him. Not sure why he'd take any less when Tkachuk just got 9.5M x 8YRs in sunny tax-free Florida.
Who knows what kind of contract we'll need to offer DeBrincat to stay in Ottawa. Maybe he'll love playing with Stützle, the team starts contending, and his wife makes great friends in the community, so he falls in line with the other guys and takes 8x$8.5M.
"Not sure why he'd take any less when Tkachuk just got 9.5M x 8YRs in sunny tax-free Florida" is no different than "Not sure why [insert Tkachuk, Norris, Stützle] would sign long-term now when they can just take a bridge and choose their destination plus make more money when the cap goes up."
Isn't that what everyone was saying for the last 2 years? And then what happened?
Who knows what DeBrincat is thinking, or will be thinking after this season. At this point, we have control of him for 2 years, so let's just enjoy watching him score some goals. The doomsday "he won't want to stay!" narrative is lame.
I've always been consistent in saying that we won't have issues re-signing the RFAs long-term, nor should we be hesitant to do so, but upcoming UFAs will be far more difficult to keep and for most of them it's not worth overpaying to keep them in Ottawa since big UFA contracts rarely work out for the teams that give them out.
People are acting like it was some kind of big accomplishment to re-sign Tkachuk, Norris and Stutzle to deals worth around 8M a year for 7-8 years, when they were RFAs that would have had to accept far less money on bridge deals for 4 years to get out of Ottawa and get to choose their destination. That's significantly different from DeBrincat's situation where he can pick his ideal destination via UFA in 2 years, possibly earlier via a sign and trade next off-season.
Every major upcoming UFA this team has had in recent years has chosen to not re-sign, and we're extremely fortunate that is the case. We're sure glad right now that Karlsson, Stone, Duchene and Dzingel didn't take our offers of long-term extensions, and trading Turris and Pageau instead of throwing big UFA contracts at them also look like great moves right now.
Last significant UFA we re-signed was Bobby Ryan, another American star forward that we had to overpay to keep in Ottawa to save face after giving up a lot for him. Would have been better off trading him after his first year instead of extending him. Might be the same with DeBrincat.
Those guys didn’t have contracts, they had to sign. Aside from Huberdeau, and Calgary gave him a massive contract.It wasn't too early for Fiala, Tkachuk or Huberdeau, despite not having played a game for their new teams.
People are acting like it was some kind of big accomplishment to re-sign Tkachuk, Norris and Stutzle to deals worth around 8M a year for 7-8 years, when they were RFAs that would have had to accept far less money on bridge deals for 4 years to get out of Ottawa and get to choose their destination. That's significantly different from DeBrincat's situation where he can pick his ideal destination via UFA in 2 years, possibly earlier via a sign and trade next off-season.
Which of Fiala, Tkachuk or Huberdeau was two years out from UFA?It wasn't too early for Fiala, Tkachuk or Huberdeau, despite not having played a game for their new teams.
Is there a league rule that says Debrincat cannot sign a new contract with Ottawa right now?Which of Fiala, Tkachuk or Huberdeau was two years out from UFA?
Their situations weree different and there's no way for you to negatively spin this around not wanting to sign.
We don't have to sign him now. Both sides saying wait and see. The end.
Posted this in another thread but makes more sense here :
In my mind the Senators have 2 options with Debrincat:
1. Trade him next summer ala Tkachuk.
2. Walk him straight to free agency and let him leave for free with a 1 year contract ala Stone
I would do the latter.
The price senators paid to acquire him makes 2 years just fine. I think debrincat would take a "discount" to get to FA asap.
1X8. Best of luck in your future endeavors.
Different situations.
Tkachuk and Fiala both knew that they were not going to re-sign with their former teams, were up front about it, and essentially navigated their way to their preferred destinations by limiting who they would talk extension with.
Huberdeau got a contract offer that he and his agent knew would not be matched in free-agency.
DeBrincat, from all reports, wanted to stay in Chicago and was not involved in any trade discussions. And we're not going to come in with a way over the top offer of $10.5M per.
So technically you're right, how could he know? He couldn't. He doesn't have a crystal ball.I don’t think that’s accurate …
How could Huberdeau know what would be offered in UFA next season?
I mean, next year's deadline. In year two of his time in Ottawa.Definitely our best forward
Nah dude it’s terrible
Huh
My perspective is that he seems a lot like Matthew Tkatchuk. So if by next year he plays cat and mouse with us regarding a contract, then we trade him. I didn't mean this years.Act like what, he said he wants to see if he is a good fit on team.