Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Artem Zub (D) Part 2 [Extended 4 years @ $4.6M]

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
DaveMatthew said:
Simpson went way overboard.

Is it a perfect contract? No. Is it “terrible”? That’s ridiculous. Having a top 4 defenseman locked in at 2.5M for the next two seasons is in no way terrible.
Click to expand...

Its the least best option IMO
Worse:
- him leaving the NHL

How on earth could it be a negative to have him signed for 3/4/5 years at somewhere between 3.5 -4.5 ??!
Other good players coming?!
1. are we only allowed a certain number of good players under contract lol?
2. If he’s cost controlled and under contract we can trade him if we like, or trade one of the other guys?! He’s a top 4 RHD I wonder if we’d get anything for him???

again super happy we have Zub signed but Dorion’s description of why is right up there with the stupidest things he’s uttered. The man simply had no ability to communicate or shape a story.
It’s ridiculous.
 
Wondercarrot said:
Its the least best option IMO
Worse:
- him leaving the NHL

How on earth could it be a negative to have him signed for 3/4/5 years at somewhere between 3.5 -4.5 ??!
Other good players coming?!
1. are we only allowed a certain number of good players under contract lol?
2. If he’s cost controlled and under contract we can trade him if we like, or trade one of the other guys?! He’s a top 4 RHD I wonder if we’d get anything for him???

again super happy we have Zub signed but Dorion’s description of why is right up there with the stupidest things he’s uttered. The man simply had no ability to communicate or shape a story.
It’s ridiculous.
Click to expand...

It certainly wouldn't be a bad thing to have him signed for 3/4/5 years at that rate (although we have no idea if Zub would have accepted that).
But it's not the end of the world to have him signed to a 2 year deal.

There are tons of things that could happen over the next 2 seasons:

• JBD could develop into a top 4 player
• Brannstrom could move to the right-side when Sanderson joins the team
• Zub could regress
• Zub could perform as well as he did this year, or better, and we could extend him after this season
• A mystery player could join the team and establish himself as a top 4 RD (2 years ago, we were "not going to be able to replace Demelo". Who predicted Zub?)

For a budget team like Ottawa that will have several top-end young players to extend over the next 2-3-4 seasons, flexibility is needed.
 
Wondercarrot said:
Its the least best option IMO
Worse:
- him leaving the NHL

How on earth could it be a negative to have him signed for 3/4/5 years at somewhere between 3.5 -4.5 ??!
Other good players coming?!
1. are we only allowed a certain number of good players under contract lol?
2. If he’s cost controlled and under contract we can trade him if we like, or trade one of the other guys?! He’s a top 4 RHD I wonder if we’d get anything for him???

again super happy we have Zub signed but Dorion’s description of why is right up there with the stupidest things he’s uttered. The man simply had no ability to communicate or shape a story.
It’s ridiculous.
Click to expand...

He's played 40 some games against only six teams in the league. There just isn't enough sample size to suggest he should have earned a long contract. Three would have been decent, but two is perfect for the risk/reward.
 
Any inside knowledge if they did offer him a longer term contract (and for how much?) but Zub just declined? Is it possible that they lowballed him and so he decided to take a shorter deal that gets him straight to UFA?

PD's messaging on that deal is poorly worded, I agree with Simmer, just terrible PR. Why on earth would you say publicly that this is a great cheap contract for the team with 2 years being the ideal length because you expect JBD and Lassi to step in by then? Like you are publicly slighting the guy by stating he's just a stop-gap and probably isn't considered an important player in the future of the team by management even though we HOPE that JBD and Lassi will be able to reach Zub's level of play once they mature, and it's unlikely both reach it, especially in 2 years from now. I feel like he was overcompensating a little with that response to counter the obvious criticism coming his way about the length of the deal. 3-5 years at 3.5-4mil would've been ideal, our depth at RHD is a weak spot for us with big question marks still remaining for the foreseeable future, would've been nice to lock him in. If he keeps up his play or gets even better next couple years, not sure if we'll be able to afford him. He can easily get 5-6m per at market value when he's in his prime at age 27, good chance he wont be here after this contract. A little unfortunate but nice to have him around for the time being.
 
Wondercarrot said:
Its the least best option IMO
Worse:
- him leaving the NHL

How on earth could it be a negative to have him signed for 3/4/5 years at somewhere between 3.5 -4.5 ??!
Other good players coming?!
1. are we only allowed a certain number of good players under contract lol?
2. If he’s cost controlled and under contract we can trade him if we like, or trade one of the other guys?! He’s a top 4 RHD I wonder if we’d get anything for him???

again super happy we have Zub signed but Dorion’s description of why is right up there with the stupidest things he’s uttered. The man simply had no ability to communicate or shape a story.
It’s ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I think people are going a bit overboard with this. Sure, signing Zub to a longer contract has value but let's not forget that Zaitsev was also very good in Toronto and then signed what people considered a really fair deal and while it turned out fine ... It isn't a great contract either. I understand what you're saying and I agree with it. I just think there is value to both situations.

The bottom line is that we still don't know what Zub will look like going forward. It is possible that he struggles a bit more next season and it is also possible that he becomes better but we don't know. We're a salary team and making a long term commitment to guys like Zub can be amazing like Turris was or can turn out poorly like White. It's a risk-based approach and Zub is not a player that'll make 7-8M on his next contract so I'm not too worried. If he's good enough to be a top 4 D going forward on this team I think you try to deal Zaitsev in 2 years and then you can re-allocate Zaitsev's money towards Zub and JBD. The other thing (and maybe the most important factor here) is that it is very possible that Zub bet on himself to get a "big ticket" in UFA and that this was his prefered option. I still don't think he's making more than 5 on his next deal, he doesn't have the profile and stat line of a 6-7M defensemen.


To me the most important thing is to lock up the bigger pieces of the puzzle to long term deals. Guys like Tkachuk, Norris, Batherson, Sanderson, Pinto, Stutzle. These are the guys I want to see on longer term deals. For guys like Zub, C.Brown, Paul and etc, they are great supporting pieces but I think you can't lose sight of what the important pieces on this team will be in a year or two. We will inevitably lose some of these guys in the next years as our best players start getting paid. The good news is we have a lot of guys who will come in a potentially replace these guys for cheap. (Sokolov, Crookshank, Greig, Jarventie, Kelly, JBD, Thomson maybe).

In terms of Dorion though we all agree he can't speak in public.
 
Last edited:
Tranquilo Naito said:
The opportunity to extend happens after the first year of a 2 year contract. With a 1 year contract, it only happens after January in the contract year. There is very little difference there except the team has cost certainty for that second year. Plus, with COVID uncertainty, you can delay a significant portion of the salary to the second year of the contract.

If Zub wants to stay, he'll get to decide next summer either way.
Click to expand...
RFA vs UFA no difference. ok whatever you say. As a player I know I would much prefer to be a UFA
 
FormentonTheFuture said:
He's played 40 some games against only six teams in the league. There just isn't enough sample size to suggest he should have earned a long contract. Three would have been decent, but two is perfect for the risk/reward.
Click to expand...

Oh. so it’s not because we have two top 4 RHD players that will be potentially taking those two top 4 spots away from Zub?
Because that’s how Dorion framed it.
Also he’s only played against 6 teams?!
- are the other 25 teams playing a different form of ice hockey? If nothing else you could say he’s played against more elite offensive talent than defensemen from any other division.
- we obviously see it differently since there is zero doubt in mind this guy is a top 4 Dman daily on this league. With that in mind moving him or one of the others if need be is an easy task, and we’d actually get something for our controlled asset.

The only viable/reasonable explanation is that Zubs agent insisted on 2 yrs and the Sens didn’t want to get in a protracted contract dispute.
That said, if that’s the case then Dorion is an even worse spinner/communicator etc than I thought possible - and I already think he’s awful at it.
 
People need to accept that this is 99% Zub's side playing it smart and looking to cash in big in the next contract. They had zero leverage at the moment to strike a big contract, they knew that, and Dorion knew that he could not go crazy based on 47 games.

The fact people think a 4 year $16 million dollar contract was there for Dorion to take advantage of is ridiculous, Zub was not going to sign for that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sweatred
Wondercarrot said:
Oh. so it’s not because we have two top 4 RHD players that will be potentially taking those two top 4 spots away from Zub?
Because that’s how Dorion framed it.
Also he’s only played against 6 teams?!
- are the other 25 teams playing a different form of ice hockey? If nothing else you could say he’s played against more elite offensive talent than defensemen from any other division.
- we obviously see it differently since there is zero doubt in mind this guy is a top 4 Dman daily on this league. With that in mind moving him or one of the others if need be is an easy task, and we’d actually get something for our controlled asset.

The only viable/reasonable explanation is that Zubs agent insisted on 2 yrs and the Sens didn’t want to get in a protracted contract dispute.
That said, if that’s the case then Dorion is an even worse spinner/communicator etc than I thought possible - and I already think he’s awful at it.
Click to expand...
This season wasn't normal in any sense. Playing the same teams over and over again isn't the same as playing the entire league in an 82 game season. I think you're making way too big of a deal about what Dorion said. It was a fine comment. In two years, Zub could be the #3 behind Zaitsev and JBD. And there's Brannstrom who could move over to RD. Sens could also add an RD in free agency or trade, bumping him down more. I think two years gives you flexibility to evaulate him and the group, and not get tied into another Zaitsev contract.
 
TheDebater said:
People need to accept that this is 99% Zub's side playing it smart and looking to cash in big in the next contract. They had zero leverage at the moment to strike a big contract, they knew that, and Dorion knew that he could not go crazy based on 47 games.

The fact people think a 4 year $16 million dollar contract was there for Dorion to take advantage of is ridiculous, Zub was not going to sign for that.
Click to expand...
I would also argue that the fact he didn't claw for every dollar and just went and accepted 2.5 M instead of pushing all summer for 3.0-3.5 is a good sign he won't be playing hard ball and go for the moon if next year goes well for all parties, standings wise and team chemistry of ice wise
 
It's a win-win for both parties. If Zub regresses the contract doesn't look bad, if Zub gets even better he just added extra mils to his next contract. If he wants way too much for Melnyk then you can ship him off at the deadline for a very nice return because he's a underpaid top-4 RD - and those are in high demand.
 
We should just give Zub to Seattle as a thank you for selecting Tierney.

Based on the discussion here, so many people think Zub's contract is shit and that he's going to run away in two years. We can just sign him to a long-term contract when he most certainly bails on Seattle and pay him $5m. It'll fit our competitive window perfectly and we'll have him in his prime.
 
Adele Dazeem said:
It's a win-win for both parties. If Zub regresses the contract doesn't look bad, if Zub gets even better he just added extra mils to his next contract. If he wants way too much for Melnyk then you can ship him off at the deadline for a very nice return because he's a underpaid top-4 RD - and those are in high demand.
Click to expand...

Actually I would counter that thought with the notion that very rarely do playoff teams trade away their UFA'S at the deadline if it means disrupting chemistry and losing a valuable peice to your playoff run.

That is probably the only negative aspect to this deal, the potential to lose Zub for nothing if we cannot get him signed before the summer two years from now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SENStastic
TheDebater said:
Actually I would counter that thought with the notion that very rarely do playoff teams trade away their UFA'S at the deadline if it means disrupting chemistry and losing a valuable peice to your playoff run.

That is probably the only negative aspect to this deal, the potential to lose Zub for nothing if we cannot get him signed before the summer two years from now.
Click to expand...

That's only true if we're a Playoff team next 2 season. That's a big question mark.
 
Wondercarrot said:
Its the least best option IMO
Worse:
- him leaving the NHL

How on earth could it be a negative to have him signed for 3/4/5 years at somewhere between 3.5 -4.5 ??!
Other good players coming?!
1. are we only allowed a certain number of good players under contract lol?
2. If he’s cost controlled and under contract we can trade him if we like, or trade one of the other guys?! He’s a top 4 RHD I wonder if we’d get anything for him???

again super happy we have Zub signed but Dorion’s description of why is right up there with the stupidest things he’s uttered. The man simply had no ability to communicate or shape a story.
It’s ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Ok, but why in the world do you think Zub would be quick to sign that deal you outlined?

A much smarter move for him would be to sign the deal he signed, and then he can workout a new longer term deal as a UFA. There is no way PD could force him to sign a longer term deal, and no reason to pay him millions more over the next two years to try and entice him.

If he deserves 5 mill a year in two years, we’ll offer him that as we did Methot. The team situation is becoming more and more attractive here, and guys who are part of this core are going to want to stay. If not? Then Zub gets traded next season and we move on.

We can’t expect players to sign deals we want them to, that aren’t in their best interests. Two years is a good agreement between player and team. It gives them lots of show and see time, and lots of negotiating an extension time.

1.8 and 3.2 is excellent value for Zub at them moment to boot.
 
I would have preferred the 1 year deal as well so he's still RFA but do we even know if he would accept that? Zub has good leverage for an RFA, he's a fairly young KHL vet and just had a good season in the NHL. There's no doubt a decent multi-year contract was waiting for him in the KHL if he wanted it.
 
Ice-Tray said:
Ok, but why in the world do you think Zub would be quick to sign that deal you outlined?

A much smarter move for him would be to sign the deal he signed, and then he can workout a new longer term deal as a UFA. There is no way PD could force him to sign a longer term deal, and no reason to pay him millions more over the next two years to try and entice him.

If he deserves 5 mill a year in two years, we’ll offer him that as we did Methot. The team situation is becoming more and more attractive here, and guys who are part of this core are going to want to stay. If not? Then Zub gets traded next season and we move on.

We can’t expect players to sign deals we want them to, that aren’t in their best interests. Two years is a good agreement between player and team. It gives them lots of show and see time, and lots of negotiating an extension time.

1.8 and 3.2 is excellent value for Zub at them moment to boot.
Click to expand...

it’s excellent value for the owner, and poor value for the fans.
Now with respect to Zubs camp insisting on 2 years? Ok , I get it - it’s why I’ve literally said in every post that if that’s the case ok, hands are more tied. HOWEVER - then WTF is Dorion talking about with his idiotic explanations of JBD and Thompson etc etc etc.
How about leaving all the cement headed unbelievable nonsense out his explanation and just say that...he’s either lying or he’s an complete incompetent when it comes to speaking - in which case he should have someone else speak on his behalf.
 
Wondercarrot said:
it’s excellent value for the owner, and poor value for the fans.
Now with respect to Zubs camp insisting on 2 years? Ok , I get it - it’s why I’ve literally said in every post that if that’s the case ok, hands are more tied. HOWEVER - then WTF is Dorion talking about with his idiotic explanations of JBD and Thompson etc etc etc.
How about leaving all the cement headed unbelievable nonsense out his explanation and just say that...he’s either lying or he’s an complete incompetent when it comes to speaking - in which case he should have someone else speak on his behalf.
Click to expand...

I think it’s weird. PD sounds pretty much like every single other GM on the planet when he talks to the media.

He is never going to divulge things to the press that he doesn’t want to. Someone else speaking for the org may sound more polished, but they will say the same things. Media will still eventually want to speak to the man who makes the decisions, not a mouth piece.

Some people in here don’t like the man and it clouds their opinions.

Of course he’s going to say the timing works great for the organization. It’s the right thing to say for the fans, and it’s the right thing to say to Zub and his reps. He’s putting it out there that the team is good regardless of what happens, and that’s just if Zub’s camp was the one that insisted on two.

You want transparency from a person and a job that has never ever happened and never ever will. That sounds like a problem with expectations, and making things personal.

Also, there is nothing idiotic about the potential of either young defence man in two years.
 
Last edited:
Asquaredx2 said:
I'm starting to worry we're going to lose Chabot for nothing in 7 years
Click to expand...

Maybe it was a joke but completely different situations. Chabot will be 31 y/o when his contract expires, Zub will be 27 y/o

I'm hoping Chabot will still be good by then and worth re-signing (in that case he'll probably be extended 1 year ahead) but compare the situations :

- Chabot : Homegrown talent, drafted and developed by Ottawa and spent his first 11 NHL years with them. Long term relationships with many people around the team/city. It could be easy to re-sign him, particularly if the team has some kind of success.

- Zub : after his contract, it will be 3 NHL years in Ottawa. You have to hope that the team starts having a bit of success to interest him to stay and are also ready to give him full market value.

Sens went maximum 8 years lenght with Chabot's contract... They went 2 years for Zub.
 
Sorry, I should have included the sarcasm smiley on my Chabot comment.

We just re-signed a player we all love, 3 minutes after the season ended. Why are we getting all worked up about an off-season two years from now? People are commenting like the sky is falling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom