Confirmed Signing with Link: [DAL] Jamie Benn (8 years, $9.5M AAV)
- Thread starter Shaw65
- Start date
Butch 19
Go cart Mozart
I watch Jamie Benn (only) 4x a year, and he is flat out awesome.
Worth every bit of 9.5 - especially at his age.
GoJetsGo55
Registered User
RuneMcEres
Seasons in the Abyss
With his style of play, he's going to break down big time in his early thirties. But still, Dallas had no choice. Fair deal.
Why must there always be those who have to complain about everything? Benn is the best power forward in the game right now and is only 26. This contract was a no-brainer. Getting it done now and saving a year of drama was the absolute best thing for DAL and the player. The term and value is exactly where it should be. If any player deserved this type of contract it is Benn. Some of you negative posters need to get a new hobby.
Mr Positive
Cap Crunch Incoming
- Nov 20, 2013
- 38,087
- 19,016
I definitely agree that Dallas had to keep Benn.
But man, he'll be 28 when he steps on the ice under his new contract. Then it's 8 years, and he'll be nearly 36 when it's over. This is not the end of the world of course. Dallas just has to manage their cap, which isn't as big a deal as many make it out to be. I would say it's almost certain he will be overpaid within a few years of this deal though. If you dissed the Oilers signing Lucic for 7 years at 6 AAV, you'd have to wince at this one a little bit. Personally, I liked the Lucic deal, and I don't mind this one so much.
But man, he'll be 28 when he steps on the ice under his new contract. Then it's 8 years, and he'll be nearly 36 when it's over. This is not the end of the world of course. Dallas just has to manage their cap, which isn't as big a deal as many make it out to be. I would say it's almost certain he will be overpaid within a few years of this deal though. If you dissed the Oilers signing Lucic for 7 years at 6 AAV, you'd have to wince at this one a little bit. Personally, I liked the Lucic deal, and I don't mind this one so much.
serp
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2016
- 21,042
- 13,012
I think the problem that most people had with the Lucic deal is that he's a secondary player . ( a very good secondary player but secondary nonetheless )
Secondary players are a much bigger risk to potentially blowing up in your face than a franchise guy you already had for years .
Secondary players are a much bigger risk to potentially blowing up in your face than a franchise guy you already had for years .
SmellOfVictory
Registered User
- Jun 3, 2011
- 10,959
- 653
I don't know about that. Just off the top of my head, Lecavalier, Richards, Nash, are all franchise(ish, in Nash's case) guys whose contracts got pretty rough about halfway through. I'm sure there have been a few others as well.
Ghost of Kyiv
Wanted Dead and Alive
See, I was thinking the opposite. The difference between Benn and Lucic is absolutely massive and there is very little chance that the player(s) you sign for $3.5 million will make up for that massive disparity in talent.
Benn >> Lucic + $3.5 million in cap space IMO.
I'm perfectly fine with the Lucic signing though. Money should be spent on the top 6 and in the top 4 as they are the players that truly move the needle. Bargain shop for depth players; always perfectly competent players available for around a million dollars, and until that's no longer true, that's how salaries should be managed in the cap era.
Mr Misty
The Irons Are Back!
- Feb 20, 2012
- 7,965
- 58
For a guy as close to UFA as Benn, going through half the term before it gets "pretty rough" is a good piece of business. If he can have a season like Spezza and Sharp did this year when he's 33 and 34 and maybe beyond we'll be in great shape.
9.5 is underpaid for what he is. If he wanted 11 mil i would have signed him too. Hes a top 3 offensive player in the game franchise player.
Nothing you can replace him with with that cap hit will improve the team. Its a no brainer deal.
Nothing you can replace him with with that cap hit will improve the team. Its a no brainer deal.
bloudy
Registered User
Nemesis Prime
Registered User
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
The Kingslayer
Registered User
oconnor9sean
Registered User
I don't think Jamie Benn is not a top 10 forward in 3 years, so I guess we'll have to see.
He doesn't play the same game as guys like Morrow, Richards & Brown, whose bodies broke down on them very early into their 30's, or Lucic, who many see as a similar style to those two.
I see Benn much closer to Iginla, play wise, than Brown, Morrow or Lucic. I'm not saying he's not physical, but he offers much much more to his game than those three.
SharksCyclops
Registered User
The Zetterberg Era
Ball Hockey Sucks
Mr Positive
Cap Crunch Incoming
- Nov 20, 2013
- 38,087
- 19,016
no it's prudent to make those assumptions, but it is asinine to let a talent like Benn walk away from your team over some money, especially without a real plan in place to replace what he brings. A perfect GM who never hands out a risky contract might have an enviable cap situation but no talent on the roster either.
glovesave_35
Name
I don't really get the Lucic comparisons. Lucic is the definition of power forward in today's game and his body will fail him sooner than later because of it. Benn is a PF but he's so much more than that that it isn't really fair to smack that label on him. It would be like calling Ovechkin a sniper even though he is a bull on skates. Some guys defy simple labels and Benn is one of them.
I'm not worried about Benn being an "aging power forward" halfway through his contract. The only thing that would worry me is if he were to get concussion problems. He is way more skilled than it seems a lot of people still seem to think.
I'm not worried about Benn being an "aging power forward" halfway through his contract. The only thing that would worry me is if he were to get concussion problems. He is way more skilled than it seems a lot of people still seem to think.
I'm just going to guess we are actually talking about Lucic here now really..
It means the opinions of those that watch Dallas frequently (stars fans) are on par with those that never do. In others words, biased. Either way, I think it's a good deal. Not great, but good.
